mz,
Of course your objections are valid, some more then others.
My main goal wasn't to prove that PL is bad in itself. I couldn't care less. If i want to launch at (my) night, I just set an alarm. If i don't, I launch at daytime. My point was that reduced PL might scare ppl away, while one or maybe even the main concern has been the number of players for ages now.
I know the data isn't conclusive. If i want it to be perfect i need to:
- Correct for seasonal influence
- Somehow determine how to correct free rounds
- Have a bigger sample if possible
- Check for drops in users and see if they correlate with unpopular decisions
- Etc.
So while i agree the data isn't enough and too raw, i still think it merits further research.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mz
As I've said several times now, I don't believe a limit of prelaunching to +4 meaningfully changes anything at all, so even if we lose another 100 players this round, then that just shows people are morons. But then I'm already convinced of that, so many I'm biased.
|
It might not change anything meaningfully, except that people might THINK it changes something. But that's why you prolly call them morons then.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mz
P.S. It is interesting to see that "free" rounds still attract so many more people than "paid" rounds. To me it shows a failure to communicate that hey, PA is perfectly playavle even if you don't buy a credit!
..
and
..
1) Round 44 was free, so the data from that round should be discarded.
|
You accuse me of bad science, yet produce no statistical evidence that free rounds attract (significantly) more players. Maybe free rounds just result in the same amount of players have more planets (ie, cheating), to name an example.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mz
5) Even if the current player base does not like something, that does not mean it's a bad feature, nor is losing those players necessarily bad for PA. I've long been amazed and annoyed at how incredibly stuck people are in their ways. This is snown particularly well when someone does something unorthodox. XP whoring, fortress gals, covert operations, donating your galfund to someone at tick 24; all of these strategies and tactics caused a mass uproar when they were first used (and some still make people red hot with anger), with the usual cries of 'abuse' and 'unfairness' and demands for nerfs. PA 3.0 would probably be better off without the current player base.
and..
Unfortunately, while some of my objections could be overcome with more data, I don't think this round will give us any
|
Your 5th objection isn't related to my usage of numbers, but is your opinion of people and their behaviour
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mz
2) The same is true of round 28-33 (1432, 1420, 1628, 1696, 1551, 1447), the numbers in italic are round 30 (supposedly the last round) and 31 (bought by zPeti with much fanfare), which are anomalous and should be ignored.
|
You use this to prove I misuse numbers. You state that those numbers should be ignored. I could just as well say that they prove my right: round 30 saw an increase because ppl wanted one last round of PA, and Round 31 more people started playing because they thought good changes were gonna come. In my theory, they would fit perfectly: decisions made about PA greatly influence the number of playing people.